Single age groups would be awful.

1/It would be the same kids playing against each other each year.

2/ It would encourage pushy parents to demand that their child be put up age groups.

3/ Would mean that the better players don't get a chance to play or more importantly train against older better players every second year.

4/ You would need double the coaches of a particular D1 standard which means you'd get half the better athletes with poorer coaching than they are getting now.

5/ Dilutes the competition for spots meaning players can cruise rather than work for a spot in the first team.

Can someone explain a benefit???

All-round bad idea.

Reply #876094 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

How do clubs keep on top of actual ages of players - do they just rely on the word of the players / their parents? Have seen players who in the face if it should be going up a bracket looking to tryout at new clubs in a lower age group.

Reply #876181 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

I am not sure anyone checks do they??

Reply #876222 | Report this post

Relax Coach
Years ago

Proof of age is required when the child first registers with the club.

Reply #876233 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

Really? Not sure that is done universally. Just odd when you see kids lining up for their third year of u16 at a different club.

Reply #876235 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

Playing a third year in an age group doesn't necessarily mean much. Small clubs often have this occur when a player is well beyond the level of the kids in his own age group. I know a kid who played 4 years of U16s, whether rightly or wrongly.

However, a club was busted by the VJBL 10 or so years ago to be changing D.O.B so players could play down an age group. So I have no doubt it has happened, but I wouldn’t think it’s very common at all really.

Most, if not all clubs do check birth certificates or something of new players nowadays.

Reply #876237 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

Reality is that most (literally, most) u12 -16 1s players are born in Jan / Feb / March. Just look at the stats. If a bottom age kid makes a 1s team and is not born in Jan - March that is unusual. That of itself just shows the skewed nature of selections. How many State development kids are not born at the start of the year? Would be interesting to know!

Reply #877904 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

Reality is that most (literally, most) u12 -16 1s players are born in Jan / Feb / March. Just look at the stats. If a bottom age kid makes a 1s team and is not born in Jan - March that is unusual. That of itself just shows the skewed nature of selections. How many State development kids are not born at the start of the year? Would be interesting to know!

Reply #877905 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

A single year age grouping would amplify the early in the year advantage and create a pretty stale space as kids would walk into venues knowing the outcomes having played the same kids over and over.

That issue is relevant for the elite pathway and the community level alike. Impacts the fun and overall experience of varied adversity

Reply #877906 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

That's a fair point

Reply #877907 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

I do remember Geelong playing that 18 year in under 14s in about 2012,but he did shop himself around a bit

Reply #877915 | Report this post

Relax Coach
Years ago

Two-year age groups versus single-year age groups.

Effectively in the larger associations, the first and second teams are predominantly top age players and competing in VC or VC reserve. Now on occasion, there are some exceptionally talented bottom age players who play in the top team but for the most, it is normally top age players in the first and some bottom age players in the seconds and a major of bottom age players in the 3rd and 4th teams. Effectively creating the single-year experience in most cases already.

This actually does provide the opportunity for a bottom age player to play in a higher competition with the top age players within an age group. And if the coaches are mature enough it provides good flexibility to balance teams according to their level of player development.

In my opinion, the two year age grouping with top age and bottom age players provides flexibility and development opportunities don't really see this as broken and don't see a need for it to change

Reply #877919 | Report this post

Hoops

what is better: single or double year age groups for VJBL

Recent Posts